September 11, 2011

Having observed that we are subdued and that it is odd, Krugman applies the label: shame. We are ashamed of ourselves for what we did after the attacks.

Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue.

Te atrocity. Fix the typo, Mr. Krugman. People will think you haven't given enough weight to the atrocity. As long as we're looking for symptoms and making diagnoses, I might as well do it too.

The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.

I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.

You don't want to see what you don't want to see, which is oddly at odds with your belief that Americans have a shameful way of blinding ourselves to the full range of what is happening and what we are doing.

On the whole Krugman is right. It was not until after 9/11 that we started publishing polls indicating that the majority among us is pro-torture, for example.

And it became the justification for Iraq and Afghanistan, yay. While simultaneously cutting taxes dramatically. All the death, all the moneys poured out the sieve. All moves still defended ny people who now call themselves deficit hawks. Yes. Le us "reflect together." If we can avoid throwing up a little in our mouths.

BTW. Does anyone really rise up to deny Krugman's point about fake heroes cashing in? Is there *any* other way to explain Rudy Guliani, for example?

A simple response: if you are ashamed, along with krugman and his ilk, then support the policies and candidates he favors. Because it is all part and parcel of a specific attitude towards America and what it stands for.

On the other hand, if shame is not part of your emotional tableau today [other than shame that we allowed certain political appointees and attitudes to cripple our ability to prevent this tragedy] then you should do everything in your power to extirpate this cabal from any position of power and influence.

Americans should be subdued. The War on Terror has cost three to four trillion dollars with no end in sight. Eventually America will have problems borrowing money and then funding for our military will evaporate, as will our military.

No matter how many "Obama is bad, too!" comments y'all muster, it doesn't change the fact that what we are looking at is a ten year national trainwreck. And yes, that of course includes the years Obama has been POTUS. Socially, politically, economically, morally.

I don't know why anyone wallows in the misery that is Paul Krugman. I've never understood that old saying that misery loves company. The times when I'm feeling miserable, I want to be left alone. Reading anything by him is like covering yourself in mud.WHY?

For me, the World Trade Center existed for six days. The first time I ever saw the towers was September 5. It was the end of the line for the E train, my subway stop for the first five mornings of my freshman year of high school. New country, new city, new school. I came up the subway stairs, looked back over my shoulder, and saw the biggest object I had ever seen in my life. Looked again, and there were two of them.

There was a buy-one-get-one-free Pizza Hut commercial running on TV at the time, where the punchline was a salesman telling Japanese investors that if they would buy one tower, they'd get the second for free. So all five times I came to school, my first thought when I looked up was "Buy one, get one free."

I was in first-period American History when the first strike rattled our windows. It wasn't until the second plane hit that they swept the school, pointed us north and simply and calmly told us to walk. Look after one another and walk. Don't stop, don't turn back, don 't look back. Walk. The most important thing you can do to help is to keep walking.

Te atrocity was a unifying issue, Bush's way to deal with te atrocity garnered over 70% approval. Krugman and his ilk drove a wedge and claimed Bush, after eight whole months in office should have prevented te atrocity, Bush's calmness and continued reading My Pet Goat showed he was not presidential, not fit for office.

10 whole years later, Krugman would prefer some hysterics to highlight the "gutsy" call to kill the guy hidden in a cave (metaphorically), and diverts attention away from the doubledip recession. The double dip caused mostly by the One listening to Krugman and his ilk. After three years, it's still Bush fault for a lousy economy.

9/11 isn't the 4th of July. I remember Pearl Harbor Day being observed as a kid and people weren't exactly jumping for joy then, either.

This is a commemoration, not a celebration.

Seems the Lefties are too dense to get that.

And, since the Left has labored mightily to remove the word shame from our culture, it's interesting Krugman wants to trot it out now.

harrogate said...

On the whole Krugman is right. It was not until after 9/11 that we started publishing polls indicating that the majority among us is pro-torture, for example.

It was only after 9/11 that the Democrats got worried that they might not be able to defeat a popular war President and cooked up a phony claim of "torture" after the grand poobahs of the Party had signed onto said "torture" when they thought their lives might be at stake.

BTW. Does anyone really rise up to deny Krugman's point about fake heroes cashing in? Is there *any* other way to explain Rudy Guliani, for example?

Most of the people here, I'm guessing.

And Giuliani and Dubya did do heroic things that day and in the days afterward. That's why the Lefties, including the Gray Lady, felt obliged to slime them.

PS What has to put the icing on the cake is all those "Miss Me?" posters that have gotten popular the last 2 years.

Ten years after, even after several mistakes, we are safe, we have given a chance for freedom to a large swath of the Middle East, and our military continues to be the most passionate and professional in the world. Where do we find such men and such women?

"Having observed that we are subdued and that it is odd, Krugman applies the label: shame. We are ashamed of ourselves for what we did after the attacks."

The Left cannot own the narrative until they redefine it; ergo Krugman's contribution to redefining 9-11.

Krugman has a point, but not what he thinks it is. He and his ilk shame us, just as all the Democrats who authorized the war in Iraq were the first to push cut and run once easy victory was out of reach. They shame us as leaches of freedoms they won't earn in their own right, nor defend. But this shame is a small one, a tax in tolerating those who abuse our freedoms; they aren't worthy of the sacrifices made by the men and women in uniform for our freedoms, but the value of our freedoms are so great, the shame Krugman and his ilk bring us is almost imperceptible.

Brian Harrison, CEO of Solyndra, is a "fake hero cashing in" on the "climate change" fear! Big stimulus money (halfa billion) led to bankruptcy and 1100 laid off employees. George Kaiser, the "Oklahoma billionaire" and Obama bundler is another "fake hero" in this Crony Capitalism tale of fear and greed! He is described as one of the leading private investors in Solyndra. I am anxiously awaiting the Dowd column on this saga. It is more likely that the Kansas Koch Bros will catch the eye of the NYT>

Brian Harrison, CEO of Solyndra, is a "fake hero cashing in" on the "climate change" fear! Big stimulus money (halfa billion) led to bankruptcy and 1100 laid off employees. George Kaiser, the "Oklahoma billionaire" and Obama bundler is another "fake hero" in this Crony Capitalism tale of fear and greed! He is described as one of the leading private investors in Solyndra. I am anxiously awaiting the Dowd column on this saga. It is more likely that the Kansas Koch Bros will catch the eye of the NYT>

While the rest of us rallied around the flag and resolutely embraced the ideals that make this country great and a beacon to others, Krugman preaches 'shame.' The shame is his as he willfully fails to appreciate the heroism on that day and the acts of kindness and support that reminds us of what makes this country great in the face of resident evil.

He is smaller by comparison to those who gave their lives for others on that fateful day and continue that noble effort in the fight against radical islam around the globe. Krugman's real shame is a reflection of himself and his impotence. He is a shameful hollow excuse for a man.

Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue.

Krugman complains of 9/11 being used as a wedge issue and then uses it as a wedge issue. He denies the lefts enthusiasm for attacking al Queda. He ignores John Kerry's I was for it before I was against it. He shamelessly uses the anniversary of 9/11 to attack his political opponents.

Talk about cashing in. Krugman is getting far more attention from this than he would ever have otherwise. Of all the things to react to on this day I'm not really interested in thinking through Krugman's weird assessment of the 9/11 memorial events. I'm just putting it down to a guy looking to get attention and succeeding at it.

...it doesn't change the fact that what we are looking at is a ten year national trainwreck.

Ah! But is that really a fact? I date our national train wreck back to September 2008, and while both parties are to blame for that disaster, its seeds were clearly sown more by Democrats such as Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, than by a president who failed to fight back hard enough when designated idiot spokesman Barney Frank fatuously suggested that Fannie and Freddie needed even fewer reserves than they had. Wrong!!!

Since I am both more intelligent than you are, harrogate, and have a longer memory, I have a firm recollection that George W. Bush inherited a recession from his predecessor when the dot-com bubble collapsed. Bush correctly recognized the recession he inherited as a problem to be dealt with. The recession that Obama and his cronies inherited was incorrectly viewed as a crisis to be exploited.

So I see us as being in a three-year national nightmare, but the end is coming on January 21st, 2013.

"Then, in 2009, with widespread support of the 9/11 community and strong bi-partisan backing, they were able to secure passage of federal legislation incorporated into the Edward M. Kennedy ServeAmerica Act, that formally recognized and lead to the official establishment of September 11 as a National Day of Service and Remembrance under federal law and Presidential Proclamation. To date, more than one million people from all 50 states and 165 countries have visited the 9/11 Day website."

How this loon ever earned a Nobel prize is beyond my ability to grasp. Now that I think about it, Obama won one as well, so the Nobel has no meaning any longer. And, for the record, Krugman, I'm not at all ashamed. In fact, I would have done a lot more and gone a lot further.

Jason The wars that came after September 11, 2001 did not cost us 3-4 trillion dollars. What destroyed this country was this idiotic belief that everyone of us are entitled to the money of the one richer than us. Without September 11, 2001, without the wars in the middle East, the results will be just the same because the ones that really put America into trouble are things like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, CRA, housing bubble, Medicare/Medicaid Fraud, Welfare fraud and crony capitalism which already existed even before those 4 planes left the ground.Blaming it all on those wars is an exercise of intellectual cowardice.

I am ashamed and discouraged that so many of my good and dear friends don't know what to think until they have read it in the NY Times, that they refuse to consider any alternative if it does not bear the NY Times stamp of approval, that they belong to a sub-culture that believes they are highly informed but instead are adherents of dogma, that they think they are progressive instead of reactionary, that they are craven when they should be brave, that they believe they are enlightened when they are athwart history, that their lives are illuminated when they are huddled together in a dark corner of the zeitgeist. Yes, I am ashamed and discouraged.

While I think we will keep "feet on the ground" in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Because America needs to keep its military training. And, holding spaces on this globe that help it prepare for the future.

To get into Irak, we got lots of difficulties, then, from Turkey. (And, at some point Turkey got permission to fly over Kurdish territory in Iraq, to kill Kurds in their villages!) This was AFTER Turkey did not let out troops, waiting to come into Iraq, to land on Turkish territory. So they spent 6 nauseating weeks at sea.)

Baghdad Bob didn't become as famous as I thought he would.

And, I think many people have been more worried that the Islamic terrorists among us would keep lashing out ... to give us a tragedy on par with 9/11, again.

I think Americans are a lot more alert after 9/11. Angrier at all of Islam, as a matter of fact.

I'm reminded of a picture that I saw somewhere of a tv screen the day JFK was killed. Some 2-bit philosopher filled the camera with the word SHAME on a cue card. As is if the American people were somehow responsible for a Communist patsy assassinating the president.

"What would you have had the mayor of one of the largest cities on earth do when his city was attacked in such a fashion? Hide in his office? Not be visible?"

Is "being visible" what you call dining out to lunch on it for the next 7+ years? Making millions off of it? Keeping his face in front of every camera that he could find for 7+ years? Gesh, you would almost think he was *glad* it happened.

What that communist moron harrogate forgets is that not only was the country in a recession on 9/10 but the economy took an additional trillion dollar hit on 9/11.

It was Bush's tax rate cut and the overall appearance of competence of the Bush Administration that brought confidence back in to the market.

Notice that the present ship of fools running the country inspire no one but instead generates derision. And fear.

Isn't it amazing how Bush's deficits were terrible for the economy but Obama quadrupling the deficits is just what the doctor ordered. Paul 'Enron" Krugman is a whore. Just like any whore its only a question of the price. Pay him enough and he will sprout what ever line you want him to.

Harrogate the only thing I am ashamed of is that we didn't nuke a few Arab countries and Pakistan off the face of the earth and all that Islam is a religion of piece crap.

"What would you have had the mayor of one of the largest cities on earth do when his city was attacked in such a fashion? Hide in his office? Not be visible?"

Is "being visible" what you call dining out to lunch on it for the next 7+ years? Making millions off of it? Keeping his face in front of every camera that he could find for 7+ years? Gesh, you would almost think he was *glad* it happened.

The attacks of ten years ago WERE a unifying event, but only until the left realized we were not going to respond as we had all through the 1990s -- WTC truck bomb, Mogadishu, Khobar, east African embassies, the Cole, and so on -- which was, if anything, to light a few candles, lob a few cruise missiles and call it good.

The attacks didn't change America, and George Bush's moderate-but-robust response did not change us either: we were already very different, and at one end of the political spectrum filled with self-loathing for America, shame, and rage. Jeremiah Wright was entirely typical, though extreme in his expression.

I remember as a young teenager in 1961 the commemorations of Pearl Harbor's 20th anniversary. They were certainly subdued, without a trace of shame for the ultimate unfolding of that conflict in early August, 1945.

America in that era was not subject to the highly-feminized over-emotionalism so characteristic of our times, and consequently "subdued" was totally normal.

What I remember most was the GI-generation people around me, then in their late 30s or early 40s, remarking "Has it really been twenty years?" Given my age at the time I couldn't really comprehend what they meant.

Now, half a century later, as I hear people comment "Has it really been ten years?" I understand all too well, and perhaps somewhat more than I'd wish.

I am proud to live in a country which allows even the Krugmans of the land to spout nonsense.

If I feel any shame, it is that our society is so debased as to have a significant number of citizens who lionize the man.

As for the war itself, I have mixed feelings: On one hand, I am proud that we reformed two backward hostile countries with as little collateral damage as manageable, on the other hand I think it might have sent a better long-run message had we been more brutal about it.

The one thing that does bug me about our reaction to 9/11 is the intrusion into our individual rights. The Patriot Act, the increased domestic spying, monitoring U.S. citizens on a wholesale basis, absurd airport searches, etc.

Now that Obamaster is prez, the liberal press largely ignores this. Rights only matter when a horrid Republican is violating them.

Lots of polyanna partisan lenses happening here. Bush, Guliani,the wars, the tax cuts were heroic. Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac all by themselves brought down the US economy in 2008, while heroic bankers and GOP politicians scrambled to help. Obama=bad. Etc.

Big Mike says everything was all heroic and noble except for the Democrats. edutcher says: "And Giuliani and Dubya did do heroic things that day and in the days afterward. That's why the Lefties, including the Gray Lady, felt obliged to slime them."

Fair and Balanced indeed. Hey, you know who was even more heroic than W. and Giuliani during those dark and troubled, epic days during which GOP courage shined and the best of America was discovered? Sean Hannity. Amazing he doesn't have multiple Pulitzers for his leadership and Patriotism.

Commenters here who do not know me or much about my views at all, can do nothing but spout GOP talking points and call me a "Communist," apparently because I am not drunk on the Kool Aid.

Our nation respects the rights of fools like Krugman to waste their minds and words fighting for misguided ideas. So there is no shame for my nation, but Krugman and his ilk are another story.

Of course there is division among us. We have had similar challenges before with less division and infighting, but who has changed to cause that. The left has gotten less reflective and is now incapable of backing down in the face of its failure.

The Right is still defending what it always has - freedom and democracy.

I'm proud of what we have done. I doubt that any other nation granted our singular power would have done as much right, and respected freedom as much.

As usual, Krugman is spot on. Instead of a unifying event, it *has* been used as a wedge issue.

The only thing to be proud of is the brave Americans who responded out of human compassion, not for a political or nationalistic agenda. 9/11 cannot be divorced from the misguided over-reaction that has been the last 10 years of war.

America’s leaders (i.e. "fake heros") have badly misled us and squandered our resources (as in $10b/mo), and we should be ashamed for what has been done in our name.

America really is a great place, but unfortunately we are served poorly by our leaders. Those who died at the WTC on that day are in no way honored by the violence and hate that has erupted since.

As I wrote earlier and elsewhere... Krugman is a glimpse into the mind and mindset of the left. The cult of intellectualism. The Worship of nihilists such as Nietzsche, Russel, Sartre, Marx – while counterintuitively establishing a firm belief in the necessity to force their vision upon us. They let their worship of the nothingness of humanity form their opinions of what the “masses” should know and learn. Because (after all)…they are the “elite” – the ruling class – the intellectuals. Piss-Christ – good. Western Civilization courses and great dead white dudes – bad. Existential hatred of God and those that believe, while exhibiting faith based adherence to Mother Gaia.

In the last 50 years they have come to the forefront of power – I suspect they will not retreat without a bloody battle.

Boy not too many defences of Bush and Rudy. And nothing about Bernie Kerrick. I mean the guy stooped Judith Regan in an apartment at Ground Zero meant as a place where first responders could rest. How dare Krugman call him a "fake Hero".

Sean Hannity. Amazing he doesn't have multiple Pulitzers for his leadership and Patriotism.

Given who wins prizes nowadays (Gore, Obama,etc), I doubt Hannity cares. He's not in the business to win a prize, and the left wouldn't accept him any more if he did. Hannity's out there to dig up the truth and shed light on the lies and hypocrisy of liberals.

Post 9/11. We have Homeland Security. We have cockpit doors reinforced so passengers can no longer just "open the door to the cockpit."

We have TSA. Which people really, really hate.

And, the new laws that followed 9/11 replaced the two destroyed towers.

Bad laws. I don't think people feel any safer. Just more inconvenienced.

In the long run this is not good news for muslems.

And, I think I've noticed a diminution in the number of women who walk around wearing burkas. I've even seen fewer women with just head scarves. How did that happen? We didn't pass any laws to stop people from wearing these costumes.

But I'd bet fewer people shop in their stores. Or go to eat in their ethnic restaurants. While McDonald's business has grown ever stronger.

And, at McDonald's I've never seen anyone in Islamic headgear working behind any of their counters.

9/11 came with a price tag. Though the Saud's pretty much also escaped responsibility. They owned a whole set of politicians.

"Hannity's out there to dig up the truth and shed light on the lies and hypocrisy of liberals."

Did y'all see that? Take a good look at it. It is the face of what passes for logic amongst many of you. This has nothing to do with the relative merits of Krugman's arguments. A reasonable person who disagrees with Krugamn would also know that the sentence I quote above is delusory. Wouldn't they?

Eventually America will have problems borrowing money and then funding for our military will evaporate, as will our military.

The military isn't what's breaking the bank. It's the out of control social spending. Yeah, we'll follow the Canadians and the Europeans into toothlessness as a result, but Medicare is the reason, not Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Krugman gnome - "What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons."

==================With America in steep fiscal, economic, and international decline - there are unpleasant truths Krugman brings up about the aftermath of 9/11.

American economic domestic affairs were ignored by American leadership that fixated on terrorism, homeland security, and Iraq as the "only things that mattered".

Rudy and Kerik cashed in spectacularly, made millions each off 9/11. So did a pack of neocons elevated to lecturers and "national security consultants". Bush cashed in politically, then let an unrestrained porkfest of about 3 trillion in borrowed dollars be distributed to "the heroes who keep us all safe" - the contractors in Iraq building new airports and water parks, the "hero dogs of Tennessee" that Sen Frist brought the pork home to fit out in Kevlar doggie armor.

Aside from the Heroes Who Keep Us All 100% Safe - The healthcare and pharma industries got Republican "appropriators" led by Billy Tausin to create a6.8 Trillion dollar new unfunded mandate to have government buy drugs at premium price. Then distribute to seniors for free.

When 8 years of ignoring mounting trade, jobs, deficit, entitlement, housing bubble and fiscal bubble problems finally blew the whole neglected mess up in 2008...We had a choice. Between a socialist with no experience. And a dimbulb who knew nothing about the economy - or if he did - thought it less important than "The Surge He Championed", and the new war he wanted to launch on Iran to "keep our special friend safe".

Then Obama, thought to be the lesser of two evils that would replace the failed Bush, compounded domestic problems with what now seem to be incredibly bad calls on deficits, China, the jobs creation mess.

Not a good 10 years for America. It was ill-served by both Republicans and Democrats in power. A series of wrong calls and misplaced priorities.

But at least we have the eternal gratitude of the "noble Iraqi freedom-lovers", The Heroes of 9/11, the friendly Afghans, Chinese, and bailed out Goldman Sachs bankers, the TSA Heroes, and Freddie Mae people.

"The eradication of memories of the Great War. -SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT ORGAN

The Socialist Government speaks:

THOUGH all the Dead were all forgot And razed were every tomb,The Worm-the Worm that dieth not Compels Us to our doom.Though all which once was England stands Subservient to Our will,The Dead of whom we washed Our hands, They have observance still.

We laid no finger to Their load. We multiplied Their woes. We used Their dearly-opened road To traffic with Their foes:And yet to Them men turn their eyes, To Them are vows renewedOf Faith, Obedience, Sacrifice, Honour and Fortitude!

Which things must perish. But Our hour Comes not by staves or swordsSo much as, subtly, through the power Of small corroding words.No need to make the plot more plain By any open thrust;But-see Their memory is slain Long ere Their bones are dust!

Wisely, but yearly, filch some wreath- Lay some proud rite aside-And daily tarnish with Our breath The ends for which They died. Distract, deride, decry, confuse- (Or-if it serves Us-pray!) So presently We break the use And meaning of Their day!

Did y'all see that? Take a good look at it. It is the face of what passes for logic amongst many of you.

I suppose Hannity would could have taken the morally superior route as did Rachel "Hoover" Maddow, Ed "Fatter than Limbaugh" Schultz and Keith "Worst Person in the World" Olberman. Yes, that would have been the right thing to do.

But, no, Hannity chose the route of exposing the intellectual corruption of liberals, of uncovering their malignant "caring." He eschewed receiving awards pandering to left wing thought. He chose the road less traveled, the road of honesty and truth rather than left-wing demagoguery.

The atrocity was a unifying event. It *stayed* a unifying event right up until liberals couldn't maintain the emotion any longer. The people who changed or used the event as a wedge issue weren't those who wanted to take the fight to the enemy.

We saw the same sort of thing when Osama was found and killed. Up until then it was all "This ought to be about Bin Laden, about justice, and Bush just forgot all about him. We should be going after Bin Laden." But that was just a lie. We know it was a lie because when we *got* Bin Laden the "thoughtful" sorts suddenly realized they didn't approve of assassination or just killing some useless old man. All the calls to "get" Bin Laden were nothing but political ploys for them, and now we have proof of that.

I've come to the conclusion that it's never about doing anything. It's always about making the right noises and feeling good about yourself. Just as soon as someone actually follows through the second thoughts start and the shame starts and the shifting of blame starts.

I suppose the rest of us are supposed to understand that the end goal is actually the initial emotionalism, that we're not supposed to believe anyone when they're just venting. Because Bush's initial response was too moderate for most, too restrained, and that wasn't just conservatives calling for nuking Afganistan to the stone age (redundant as that would have been) it was liberals, too. And when they stopped being emotional they were ashamed.

So Krugman, and those who agree with him, can (and do) speak for themselves.

They supported retaliation, supported war, without a thought to what that meant, and when they found out they looked for someone else to blame.

--SDN-Hoss the mormon joto, the link's there, isn't it, you mumbling dimwit--to a real blog. Unlike your dozens of little fake names/blogs with no posts, no info,no nada. Like the space between your ears. NADA. Remember H20man? He and many other youve deceived for months, if not years have been notified of yr right wing posts here, and white supremacist pals, you piece of garbage.

-Nachos, trying to act machos again,in your usual ugly peasant fashion. Do you even understand Krugman's point? Or you just like GW Bush.

--something had to be done,and the "atrocity" may have been a unifying event. But the Toby Keith heroics aren't needed at this stage, synova. Besides what is the final body count--Americans at 9-11 3000 or so; 2000 military. Upwards of a million iraqis and thousands of afghans (notwithstanding no proven link between AQ and iraqi/Hussein).

I sometimes wonder if Paul Krugman is pulling a "family guy": Getting more and more viciously, stupidly obnoxious week on week in an effort to find what it will take for the outlet that holds his leash to let him go. (Naturally, the martyr's speech has been ready for years.) Will the New York Fishwrap please fire him now before he resorts to posting his penis, the next most disgusting thing he can do after today's droppings?

That's a great point. When did that stop, anyway? Why? And what does that tell us about the conditions under which we'll stop doing things on 9/11?

If I had to guess—and I don't know; it's just speculation; if you do know, please say so—it started with some idiot like Paul Krugman telling us that we ought to be ashamed of our provoking Japan into an attack, and that we ought to be more sensitive to the many Japanaese-American citizens by killing the memorial. That sure couldn't happen again, right?

DADvocate said..."Now that Obamaster is prez, the liberal press largely ignores this. Rights only matter when a horrid Republican is violating them."

That door swings both ways, though. There seem to be many more "libertarians" in the GOP since Obama took office than there were when Bush was in charge.

"--something had to be done,and the "atrocity" may have been a unifying event. But the Toby Keith heroics aren't needed at this stage, synova."

That "Toby Keith" heroics aren't needed at this stage does not mean anyone should be ashamed, J.

This doesn't mean we shouldn't reevaluate what we're doing now, of course it doesn't. But that's not what Krugman was talking about. He doesn't want to own the past. Too bad. He was part of it. And so were almost all of the liberals and progressives who turned anti-war after they realized what war meant once their blood wasn't so hot anymore, or who saw it was a useful political tactic to set themselves against our efforts and our success.

What gets me is the notion that everyone else ought to be ashamed, too.

You are right, something had to be done. But it didn't have to be done because we were outraged or angry. It had to be done because we were attacked. It had to be done because that could not be allowed to stand without overwhelming answer. Both justice and warning had to be served. Something had to be done for a variety of very *stupid* human reasons that don't go away just because we understand they are stupid. We can't appear weak or defeated or it invites attack and strengthens those who'd use similar tactics. The bad guys, the real evil out there, can't be allowed even the illusion that they won.

Those aren't emotional or vindictive reasons. They aren't calls for retaliation. They don't depend on anger or hate. They just *are*. Because humans are humans and lofty thoughts about what *ought* to be means wrong and harmful decisions and even more of the bad stuff.

Will the New York Fishwrap please fire him now before he resorts to posting his penis, the next most disgusting thing he can do after today's droppings?

The NYT has to love all the attention Krugman is garnering - no editor cares if his readers are pissed off, as long as companies don't start pulling ads. Quite the opposite, in fact. Newspapers thrive on controversy.

The pathetic part is how many people, Americans, agree with this Jerry Springer of columnists. It's not enough to be taken in by the Keynesian cargo cult, but they have to engage with this kind of flaccid sophistry as well? Just what is the average IQ in this country, anyway?

Gene: Because he said something foul and doesn't want to provide a forum for a million "me too" comments calling him a prick.

You have to realize hat Krugman is ashamed of this column too. He has to do it, so he dutifully cranks it out, but I think it sickens him. A sad, lost little man who already feels the warmth under his feet.

BTW - Here's how some liberals commemorate 9/11. By dredging up "September 11, 1973, when the U.S. succeeded in its intensive efforts to overthrow the democratic government of Salvador Allende in Chile with a military coup that placed General Pinochet's brutal regime in office."

I realize that this is 134 comments in but Go Fuck Yourself Mr. Krugman. If we're so ashamed wouldn't comments be a chance for confession and catharsis? I guess you're wrong then aren't you. And you write for the New Your Fucking Times you miserable piece of shit.

Glad to see some things haven't changed in 10 years. Sanctimonious, liberal, assholes still apoligize for our existance. The sun also rises in the east. Yaawnn. Its sad they can't hold off one more day on their pity party.

Of course Althouse would not link to the article by Ahmed Rashid to have her brood read a perspective from Lahore, Pakistan to discover how badly we have managed these two wars. 60 Billion wasted and missing, few things working in Iraq, and Afghanistan in turmoil ruled by a crook. Mislead by our "elite" leaders who promised the war would pay for itself and be over in a few years, we have nothing to cheer about expect those who have served in spite of the incompetence of their leaders.

We have a beachhead in the Middle East, bordering every problematic nation. We have Iran surrounded. Tyrants are falling like dominoes.

Your talking points are old and stale, Roesch. It must be sad, though, that your dreamy leftist fantasy of Obama has in reality been a continuation of Bush foreign policy down to every punctuation mark. That must be infuriating. And, of course, your impotency in the face of it must make you seethe.

Steven- really we have a beach head in the Middle East- what a strange way to describe the disaster in Iraq, which if you noticed none of the youth involved in the Spring uprising have used as a model-- I wonder why? And the Bush policy towards Pakistan has been a disaster--another example of supporting corrupt leaders. Talk about dreamy Neo-con fantasy, you are a prime example and your view will last about as long as Stantley McChrystal's plan lasted in Afghanistan.

Pakistan didn't fall apart until after Obama was elected. Bush handled Pakistan with kid gloves and Obama, who knew so much about the region because he was next door as a child, decided Pakistan was a proper venue for "lets show the voters that I'm bad ass." Coincidence? Who knows. Maybe, maybe not.

Obama also invaded Pakistan with our Navy SEALs. Bully for him, I say. Bush would have done the same thing, and leftists would have had a hissy fit over sovereignty.

As I say, the left is crazy over Obama's foreign policy. It's the same as Bush's (except worse on trade). The silence we hear is deafening. The way people like Roesch continue to blame Bush for policy that Obama has perpetuated and entrenched for three years is hilarious.

My first post made no mention of Obama but an article written by a Ahmed Rashid, which I suspect most of Althouse's brood will not brother with, but should. You might get a sense of just how ineffective the Bush kid glove approach has been, and while the Obama approach of using more strikes from drones has been effective, it has cost us among the average Pakistanis.Beach heads are to be held for only a few day, if we are still clinging to the beach after ten years something is very wrong Steven-- drag out a new neo-con mantra please.

Roesch -- We will be in Iraq in 50 years. One hundred years. One thousand years. As long as our interests are served. Just like in Korea, in Germany, in Italy, in Cuba, in every nook and cranny of the world.

Again, your posts are filled with impotence. Why -- if Iraq is such a bad idea -- are we still there three years into Obama's presidency?

Further, your only serious line of argument thus far has been that Bush didn't kill enough people with technological weapons in Pakistan, including innocent adults and children who invariably die in these attacks. What a dove you are!

Sleep well tonight, while serious men with guns protect you and your right to whine impotently, and while Obama perpetuates Obama's foreign policy only, by your own reckoning, with more death in Pakistan.

It is not the War on Terror that is costing us, and much of the rest of world, billions of dollars. It is the Jihad that is doing this. 9/11 was a manifestation of something that has been going on for 1400 years. The fact that the Jihad will not end is not a reason to become pacifist in the face of its threat. We live in evil times that force us to choose between bad and worse options. Liberals are like children who want to believe that if only America would stop misbehaving then everything would be peaceful and pleasant. Unfortunately, we cannot defeat the Islamic Adolf Hitlers of today by behaving like a bunch of Krugman-reading, NPR-listening post-modern Neville Chamberlains who need their diapers changed every time somebody disagrees with them on matters of public policy. Our cultural elites are not an inspiring bunch for these times. To put it bluntly, they are a miserable menagerie of politically correct invertebrates, so morally gelatinous you could spread them on your toast.

Do you really think, Scott, that if we just quit all that defense spending, stopped lining the pockets of the people who are in the business of war, that there would simply be no conflict?

Perhaps if we had no technology at all this would be true. If we had only sticks and rocks that we could pick up off the ground for free, we'd have no conflict with anyone more than, oh, 20 feet from us.

No president, acting alone, can stand up to the entrenched and sophisticated military industrial complex.

Not sure what to make of this comment. It sounds stupidly conspiratorial.

The facts on the ground are such that even liberals can understand them. And the liberals who make policy do understand them (many are careerists at State and the Pentagon), and they understand precisely that we must stay in Iraq, and that we had to undertake military operations in Libya.

As an aside, almost certainly the biggest reason did what we did in Libya is that we provided money and arms to the rebels. They were successful; it would be impossible to sleep at night if we left them hanging.

His comments come off as petty, mean-spirited, and small-minded. The anniversary of 9/11 is a day when we should rise above our political differences and come together to mourn those who lost their lives in this terrible tragedy.

Scott said..."Look, Obama couldn't even shut down Gitmo. And he ended up getting us into Libya. No president, acting alone, can stand up to the entrenched and sophisticated military industrial complex."

Of course he could have shut down Gitmo. The reason he didn't was simple and admirable: He realized, belatedly, that his earlier position had been naive and mistaken, so he reversed course. He didn't say so publicly, but that's the reality of it. And the reason he got us into Libya was also simple and admirable: No human being with a heart could have seen events in Libya and not wished that they could do something, and he realized that he was in a position to help. We can debate whether these were the right calls or not, but they're easy to explain.